[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: First call for votes for the Lenny release GR

Margarita Manterola wrote:
If we do all this, we would be voting:

A) If we trust or not the release team on making the right choices of
which bugs to ignore and which not (regardless of this being firmware
issues or what have you).  This is from now on, not just for Lenny.

B) If we want to allow sourceless firmware in Debian, defining
firmware in a way that doesn't give a waiver to anything else without
source. This is also from now on, not just for Lenny. But it's only
for firmware, not for everything with licensing problems.

C) If we want to allow stuff with some problems into Lenny, as we
already did for Sarge and Etch.

These three issues are obviously related, but are NOT the same issue,
a positive result in one does not determine what happens to the
others.  And creating one mega ballot with all the different
possibilities, only creates confusion and frustration.  So, this
should be three independent ballots.

I think the concern is, what if the results conflict?

e.g. if we get a "No" for (C) but Yes for (A). We trust the release team to make the right choices but we don't trust them to make the right choices for Lenny?

My suggestion would be to vote for (C) first, and then decide the wording on (A) and (B) depending on the outcome of (C). In which case, even if there is a conflict, the wording can clarify if the second vote overrides or doesn't override the first result.

Brian May <brian@microcomaustralia.com.au>

Reply to: